2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2018.10.034
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Patterns of re-irradiation for recurrent gliomas and validation of a prognostic score

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
12
0
2

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
1
12
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Analysis in a retrospective review has not shown any differences in OS after stereotactic or conventionally fractionated re-RT [35]. The similar outcome (mOS of 9.7 months) using conventional-, hypofractionated or SRS techniques was confirmed by another retrospective analysis of re-RT for recurrent malignant glioma [36]. The 9-month mOS with re-RT achieved in our patients with GTV median of 118 cm 3 [17,25,32].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 62%
“…Analysis in a retrospective review has not shown any differences in OS after stereotactic or conventionally fractionated re-RT [35]. The similar outcome (mOS of 9.7 months) using conventional-, hypofractionated or SRS techniques was confirmed by another retrospective analysis of re-RT for recurrent malignant glioma [36]. The 9-month mOS with re-RT achieved in our patients with GTV median of 118 cm 3 [17,25,32].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 62%
“…Both the original Combs score and its modi cation were further validated in an independent multi-centre cohort [21,29], con rming their prognostic utility in clinical practice. Researchers in Germany further pooled data in a multivariable model from 353 patients of recurrent/progressive HGG treated with salvage re-RT at various institutions to develop a novel reirradiation risk score (RRRS) based on a linear combination of initial histology, clinical performance status, and age into three prognostic groups which successfully predicted post-re-RT survival outcomes [20] and later found validation in another independent multicenter cohort [30]. In parallel, researchers from the National Institutes of Health developed a prognostic scoring system [19] in their small cohort of 31 patients with recurrent/progressive HGG treated with re-RT using three sub-scores de ned as independent factors (age, KPS, WHO grade, presence of symptoms); target control (tumor size, tumor location, presence of diffuse disease); and anticipated risk of toxicity risk (OAR location, OAR dose distribution, DFI).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another study has suggested similar survival after re-RT when using standard RT compared with stereotactic techniques [28]. Another retrospective analysis of re-RT for recurrent malignant glioma has suggested that the median OS of 9.7 months does not differ among CFRT, HFRT, and SRS [34]. Similar trend can be found in earlier data showing that FSRT (37.5 Gy/15 fx) has similar median OS but significantly lower risk of radionecrosis compared to SRS (17 Gy) despite poorer prognostic factors in recurrent high-grade glioma (GBL in 59%) [35].…”
Section: Re-rt Alonementioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, their new prognostic group has critical drawback of not including MGMT methylation status because MGMT data were not available for many patients. Nonetheless, the Niyazi score group was validated in external cohorts of 121 patients with recurrent grade II, III, IV glioma which showed median OS of 14.6, 9.76, and 5.32 months for the prognostic group [34].…”
Section: Re-rt Alonementioning
confidence: 99%